On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Digimer <linux@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 10-11-09 11:49 AM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote: >> AFAIK there are some issues with that benchmark not being free. >> >> What I'm basically looking for is a simple comparison of a few key metrics >> between common setups. For example a simple bonnie++ run on XenPV and >> KVM+virtio_blk could already give people at least some baseline numbers. >> >> Regards, >> Dennis > > I'd be happy to run some benchmarks. I've got some identical (if humble) > machines... Would you want just a Xen vs. KVM? If so, what parameters or > setup options would provide the best apples to apples comparison? > > The machines are; > - quad core athlon II x4 > - 4gb ddr3 > - 1x 7200rom 500GB drive > - Fedora 14, stripped (but identical) installs > > If these are too low end for useful results, let me know. Otherwise, > I'll fire up Xen under Michael's 2.6.32-25-172 kernel with the stock > 4.0.1 hypervisor on one machine, and can use the stock KVM/QEMU setup > for another. > > Assuming all is fine, would it matter whether the VMs were F14 vs CentOS > 5.5? > > I was thinking 3x runs each of; > > - bonnie++ > - Recompile Michael's kernel > - ?? Please make suggestions There is also an ongoing discussion about Xen vs. KVM performance on the CentOS virt list http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/2010-October/002074.html -- Todd Deshane http://todddeshane.net http://runningxen.com -- xen mailing list xen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen
